Telangana High Court
WP/37836/2012 of Pidaparthi Eswaramma Vs The Regional Passport Officer, on 28 December 2012
SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.37836 of 2012 Date: 28.12.2012 Between: Pidaparthi Eswaramma … Petitioner And The Regional Passport Officer, Secunderabad … Respondent Counsel for the petitioner: Sri K.Narsi Reddy Counsel for the respondent: Sri A.Samir Kumar
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNAREDDY
WRIT PETITION No.37836 of 2012
Date: 28.12.2012
Between:
Pidaparthi Eswaramma
… Petitioner
And
The Regional Passport Officer, Secunderabad … Respondent Counsel for the petitioner: Sri K.Narsi Reddy Counsel for the respondent: Sri A.Samir Kumar Reddy, Additional StandingCounsel forCentral Government The Court made the following :
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent has notbeen receiving her application for issuance of a fresh passport withcorrect date of birth. According to the petitioner, in the passportissued on 27.12.2010, her date of birth was wrongly shown as04.02.1961. When the petitioner allegedly approached therespondent, the latter’s office refused to entertain the application byinsisting that she shall obtain an order from the Court forentertaining such application.
Clause (c) of Circular __/401/2/5/2001, dated 18-4-2001,issued by the Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India, interalia provides as under:
“Where the initial entry has been made on thebasis of a supportive document issued by onecompetent authority i.e., School/educational authorityand the applicant subsequently requests for achange on the basis of a certificate issued by anothercompetent authority i . e . , municipal authoritiesresulting in conflicting sources of valid proof, the PIAshould direct the applicant to obtain a civil order froma competent Court of jurisdiction, certifying the validdate of birth/place of birth.”
The respondent is, therefore, directed to receive thepetitioner’s application and consider the same in the light of theabove-mentioned circular. If the respondent is convinced that theentry of the petitioner’s date of birth in the existing passport is not supported by any certificate issued by the competent authority, heshall consider the date of birth certificate of the petitioner issued bythe Principal, Aided Elementary School, Vankayalapadu Village,Inkollu Mandal, Prakasam District, on which she is placing reliance,and issue a fresh passport with the date mentioned in the saidcertificate as the petitioner’s date of birth. In a converse situation,the respondent shall pass appropriate order and communicate thesame to the petitioner. He shall complete this exercise within aperiod of one month from the date of receipt of the application fromthe petitioner.
Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of.
As a sequel, W.P.M.P.No.47980 of 2012 shall standdisposed of as infructuous.
28[th] December, 2012GHN
______________________
(C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J)